Evidently mr. hedges is a good christian, but unfortunately gandhi, a complete idiot, was not a christian, and it is not clear from the new testament if ‘jesus’ was a proponent of non-violence save as a front??? We cannot base our politics on the authority of the christian legacy (which after constantine was extremely violent).
We must look at history: all the major revolutions of the early modern used violence, including the american.
The confusions of gandhi are not christian theology, hindu theology, and the example of MLK is misleading.
Non-violent methods are an important resource under their own conditions, but we cannot let the non-violence cult take over the left. At the same time a critique of violent methods is perfectly suitable, but we have no ethical foundation to make non-violent methods absolute. Issues of violence have their own problems. The late emergence of terrorist methods has complicated the question. Violent methods can attract all sorts of wrong interpretations or fly out of control. The bolshevik era was so extreme the non-violence cult became resurgent, but the thinking of gandhi is based on the gita, which in fact legitimates violence. The sermon on the mount is totally misleading. It is the bible itself, especially in the old testament that creates the concept of the holy war.
The corporate forces that have seized control of our political and economic systems will, unchecked, drive us into extinction for profit. All we have left is nonviolent, disruptive civil disobedience. A rebellion.